Tucson Judge Dismisses School Negligence Case, Awards Defendant $3,489
A student was riding her bicycle at an intersection after school when she was struck by a vehicle. The student suffered injuries. The student's family sued the school, alleging negligence for failing to provide a crossing guard. The school argued it had no duty to provide a crossing guard for off-campus travel. The court ruled in favor of the school.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- $3,489
- County
- Pima County, AZ
- Resolved
- 2013
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Pedestrian
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
In October 2003, an eleven-year-old fifth-grade student at a charter school in Tucson, Arizona, was struck by a motor vehicle while riding a bicycle across an intersection after school. The incident occurred at the intersection of Alvernon and Speedway, where the school, Basis School, Inc., did not provide a school crossing guard, unlike other elementary schools in the Tucson Unified School District. The plaintiff suffered significant injuries as a result of the collision.
In July 2011, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Basis School, Inc., in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in Pima County. The plaintiff alleged the school was negligent for failing to provide a crossing guard, breaching its duty to prevent foreseeable harm, and creating an unreasonable risk of harm. The defendant denied any negligence and filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing there was no evidence it breached a cognizable duty to the student, nor was its conduct a proximate cause of the accident. The defendant also asserted that no state rule required it to provide crossing guards for off-campus travel and that parents were expressly informed such services were not offered.
In February 2013, the court entered judgment in favor of Basis School, Inc., finding the defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The case was dismissed with prejudice, and the defendant was awarded costs totaling $3,489.55 plus interest.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want to check your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Pima County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver was involved in a motor vehicle accident that resulted in an injury. The case was settled for $97,500.
A case involving a motor vehicle accident featured testimony from a plaintiff's expert specializing in vocational economics, rehabilitation counseling, disability assessment, labor economics, and lost wages. Few other details were available regarding the incident, the legal claims, or the case's conclusion.
A negligence lawsuit arose from a car accident involving a plaintiff and a defendant. On March 9, 2015, the plaintiff filed a petition in County Court No. 4 for Collin County, Texas, seeking to recover damages for injuries sustained in the incident. During the proceedings, the plaintiff attempted to establish past medical expenses through affidavits from medical providers. The defendant challenged the plaintiff's entitlement to these damages by filing a counter-affidavit. The plaintiff's subsequent motion to strike the counter-affidavit was denied on November 19, 2015. The matter proceeded to trial, and on January 6, 2016, a jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff. The jury awarded $41,500 in damages, which included $35,000 for past medical expenses. An appellate court later affirmed the trial court's decision.
On September 2, 2016, a collision occurred in a Plano parking lot. A plaintiff, a hotel hostess and gift-shop attendant, was driving in an aisle next to a street when a defendant, driving on the street, made a right turn into the parking lot driveway. The vehicles collided. The plaintiff claimed neck, back, and knee injuries and subsequently sued the defendant, alleging negligence in the operation of her vehicle. The plaintiff testified that she was making a left turn at the driveway when the defendant turned into it, claiming the driveway was wide enough for two vehicles but the defendant made too wide a turn. The defendant denied making a wide turn, asserting her turn was completed when the plaintiff's vehicle scraped across her front end. Photos of vehicle damage, showing front-distributed damage to the defendant's car and left front corner to driver's door damage to the plaintiff's, were presented as evidence, which defense counsel argued supported the defendant's account. The plaintiff underwent various treatments, including emergency room care, physical therapy, pain management, and MRIs revealing a meniscus tear, disc protrusions, stenosis, and a disc bulge. She sought damages for past and future medical expenses, physical pain, mental anguish, and physical impairment. Defense counsel argued the impact was not major, highlighted delays and gaps in the plaintiff's treatment, and impeached the plaintiff with evidence of a prior accident and chiropractic care despite her testimony denying previous injuries. Following a one-day trial, a jury rendered a defense verdict. The jury found that neither party's negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident. Consequently, the damages question was not addressed.
One driver was stopped at a red light when the other driver rear-ended their vehicle. The driver who was rear-ended claimed injuries to their neck and lower back. The other driver argued they were not negligent and that the impact was minor. The jury found the driver who caused the collision not liable.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.